Just Bob

Hey! Great news and great new pictures!

Actually, the '26-S is damaged. Someone placed another Lincoln cent on it and whacked it with a hammer. It could also have been done in a vise or press. That is why the letters are backwards and incuse. The '31 does look like a lamination error, though.

I think they got their money's worth out of that die.

If I may: UNC-DETAILS does not mean that the details are lacking. It means that the coin is uncirculated (has the details of an uncirculated coin), but has issues that prevent it from receiving a numerical grade, at least in the eyes of that particular TPG. If no explanation was given, it could be cleaned, tooled, damaged, or some other problem, at least in their opinion.

1964 proof sets in the original government packaging can be bought on EBay for $20 - $25. If you're looking to sell yours, you can expect a dealer to offer you about half that amount, assuming that they are proofs, and are in gem condition

I bet they had trouble getting that one to work in a gumball machine.

Same here - but it's bookmarked now.

I don't speak Spanish, but I understood that. Welcome to the forum. Bienvenido al foro.

That made it look completely different, and showed a good example of why it is next to impossible to grade (or even attribute) from pictures. But, judging from the new pictures, which,in my opinion, do NOT show a split, I would have to say no.

Welcome to the forum. The quote above is very relevant to the subject at hand. Years ago, it was not only acceptable to clean your coins, it was often recommended. Books and trade publication would sometimes print tips on how to clean them properly, and cleaning supplies could be found at coin shows and hobby shops .I'm not exactly sure when it fell out of favor, but now it is anathema. There are, however, still a lot of cleaned coins floating around out there in private hands and dealer showcases, and not all of them are obvious. Your coins may have been cleaned when they were first collected (or even before), or may have been wiped or dipped by a family member or someone else who handled them. My best advice is to study them closely, using different powers of magnification and different types and angles of lighting. Try to see what the graders saw - especially on the one with altered surfaces. It is an expensive lesson, but something worthwhile can come from it. Feel free to post pictures, if you would like the opinions of some of us. Just try to make sure they are as clear and close as possible. (and, preferably with the portrait or reverse design aligned properly - one of my pet peeves. I'm getting too old to stand on my head to view a coin) Good luck in the future.

The letters look "split" like a doubled die, but that is a little too unclear for me to make a call on it. Can you try it again without the flash?

Discovered - by you (which is very cool, by the way) - in 2015, and given a new attribution by Paul, the 50 cent guru. Has anyone found another one since then? Has it been added to the list of doubled halves? Did you ever send it off to have it graded?

Welcome to The Forum, Teacher Brian. Very nice first post!

Can you provide a little more detailed explanation for those of us who are ignorant of Canadian coinage?

I agree with this. It could have been localized damage that occurred 100 years ago, and then the coin could have circulated for another 40+ years, obscuring most of the marks from the damage. With that much wear, I don't think it is possible to determine the exact cause. Welcome to the forum.